Jump to content
Guest Sukhi1

How many wife's did our guru's really have?

Recommended Posts

Just now, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Why can't a man dress up in rhinestone , diamonds or other kinds of brooches ? Whats the problem ?

I am sure Guru Gobind Singh ji maharaj would find this idea quite ludicrous that his sikhs don't want to wear kalgi because he did.

Maharaj wanted his sikhs to be sovereign, and in likeness of him. He even bowed down to take amrit . He's chela too and a dutiful sikh is his guru . This is pyaar di khel I understand and respect that, but at the same time, if a man wanna dress up and makes him happy, then let us not create a fuss over it. unless he's trying to mimick something that Guru Gobind Singh ji did in his life.

Secondly , all grooms remove kalgi while in front of SGGS. So its not even an issue.

by your adorning yourself in such manner does it takes you closer of further away from MOH to this world?

By switching attention and staying santokhi in simple dress and concentrating on Guru ji instead -is this ai better choice or not?

think who your focus is on ...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jkvlondon said:

by your adorning yourself in such manner does it takes you closer of further away from MOH to this world?

By switching attention and staying santokhi in simple dress and concentrating on Guru ji instead -is this ai better choice or not?

think who your focus is on ...

I respect your opinion whole heartedly but tell me , does being spiritual mean we do complete tyaag of worldly things ?

how far should we stretch our "simpleness" ?

should do tyaag of cinemas , tasty food , family outings , fashion , desires , etc etc ??

I believe we can wear things and enjoy things as long as we don't let the mud stick to us. And THAT TBH is very very tough for someone who's not a spiritual master. 

I totally relate everything you say , but my mind wavers a lot . There's this internal battle between materialism and spirituality 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

I respect your opinion whole heartedly but tell me , does being spiritual mean we do complete tyaag of worldly things ?

how far should we stretch our "simpleness" ?

should do tyaag of cinemas , tasty food , family outings , fashion , desires , etc etc ??

I believe we can wear things and enjoy things as long as we don't let the mud stick to us. And THAT TBH is very very tough for someone who's not a spiritual master. 

I totally relate everything you say , but my mind wavers a lot . There's this internal battle between materialism and spirituality 

we are supposed to be mindful of the effect of things on us , if we are watching something is it making us full of kaam, irkha, or nafarat, krodh. Sure we can appreciate food/drink but if it makes us ill , full of bad soch or lobhi then it is no good to us . Same with family enjoy them and be there for them but still work on the basis this all is temporary and work on ourselves. It is hard but necessary else we'll lose the point of life  

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

we are supposed to be mindful of the effect of things on us , if we are watching something is it making us full of kaam, irkha, or nafarat, krodh. Sure we can appreciate food/drink but if it makes us ill , full of bad soch or lobhi then it is no good to us . Same with family enjoy them and be there for them but still work on the basis this all is temporary and work on ourselves. It is hard but necessary else we'll lose the point of life  

 

Again I agree, but I wonder sometimes "Will it become a boring life ?" 

Oh well, why do I even ask . Why not try living it , atleast for a while , isn't it ?

The more we indulge in world , the more we find in its tentacles.

But then again , what if you did tyaag maximum, but then in old age regret all the things you didn't enjoy ?

Do nuns regret they turned old virgins and never got a man to touch them ? I , being a guy who feels very very strong desire for handsome men, would definitely not want to die without ever being in the warm embrace of a loving man. Men are too beautiful a creation of god .  I can't even understand how religious ppl can even give up intimacy for lifetime ?

Perhaps its all a big illusion, but tell me , its very tough I guess to ride on a track whose one rail is spirituality and other is materialistic joys of the world . 

Edited by AjeetSinghPunjabi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Again I agree, but I wonder sometimes "Will it become a boring life ?" 

Oh well, why do I even ask . Why not try living it , atleast for a while , isn't it ?

The more we indulge in world , the more we find in its tentacles.

But then again , what if you did tyaag maximum, but then in old age regret all the things you didn't enjoy ?

Do nuns regret they turned old virgins and never got a man to touch them ? I , being a guy who feels very very strong desire for handsome men, would definitely not want to die without ever being in the warm embrace of a loving man. I can't even understand how they can even give up love for life ?

Perhaps its all a big illusion, but tell me , its very tough I guess to ride on a track whose one rail is spirituality and other is materialistic joys of the world . 

not boring unless you don't get out there ...I mean you could take time out and do sewa abroad , fund raise by doing some challenges, find love in helping children abandoned by the world loads of stuff , all it takes is imagination.

problem with nuns is they have to give up their families and freedom in a symbolic marriage to 'jesus'    whereas priests are free to have ties to their folks . Both are told to be celibate but this is not something  their Guru told them but a manmade church.  that's why the nuns becoming embittered as they go through life . 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jkvlondon said:

not boring unless you don't get out there ...I mean you could take time out and do sewa abroad , fund raise by doing some challenges, find love in helping children abandoned by the world loads of stuff , all it takes is imagination.

problem with nuns is they have to give up their families and freedom in a symbolic marriage to 'jesus'    whereas priests are free to have ties to their folks . Both are told to be celibate but this is not something  their Guru told them but a manmade church.  that's why the nuns becoming embittered as they go through life . 

perhaps why they become VALAK nuns ? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/09/2017 at 3:42 AM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

This is the most ridiculous response to a most ridiculous question.. Basically if you can't elevate your intellect to provide a reasonable response better to just shut up 

And you are? Yeah. Sit back down. Respond to the post or stfu. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji didn't discriminate between satguru as their is only one same satguru for every yug.  He told us to praise, worship, meditate on the one and only satguru.  He wrote about the 24 incarnations of Vishnu and he corrected what happened actually to the 24 incarnations.  If Krishna and Vishnu were satguru, Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji would have said it in his writing about them.  Instead he wrote to say I don't praise them or think of them, I hold Mahakaal ( which translates into Vaheguru in this context as he is the destroyer of all) praise only in my mind.
    • people need to stop having WWA matches with rehits imo. 
    • This whole jathabandi nonsense has had a negative impact on Sikhi, and I wish we would do away with it.
    •   Jagsaw, I am very surprised that you consider the movement of Sikhs out of areas with substantial Sikh populations to be "progress". First of all, I thought you lived in Southall?  Or perhaps another part of West London?  If so, I find it odd that you consider it a positive thing not to live in areas such as the one that you yourself live in. Second of all, I think you are greatly overlooking just how much of a positive impact that living in an area with a substantial Sikh population can have when it comes to preserving our religion and culture.  It is foolish to discount the importance of children being able to grow up in a "community", with Gurdwaras and Khalsa Schools nearby, with peers who come from the same background, who practice the same things, speak the same language.  I credit the "ghettoization" of the Sikh community in the UK for preserving the Sikh religion and Punjabi culture despite several generations having elapsed.  The vast majority of Sikhs in the UK trace their roots in the UK to the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s.  Yet somehow, young Sikhs in the UK appear to be more religious and interested in Sikh issues than the Sikh youth in Canada or America.  Somehow, young Sikhs in the UK seem to have almost as much exposure to Punjabi language and culture as their American and Canadian counterparts whose families arrived from India in the 1980s and 1990s. In America, the vast majority of Sikhs live in cities and neighborhoods with effectively no Sikh presence.  That has an impact.  It leads to young Sikhs who grow up with little knowledge of, connection to, or regard for their religion and culture.  It leads to interfaith marriages that effectively wipe out Sikhi from families.  It cripples our ability to safeguard our way of life.  I very much doubt that young Sikhs in America in the year 2060, whose families arrived in the 1990s, will speak fluent Punjabi, go to the gurdwara, engage with their religion, and connect to Sikh political issues the way that a surprisingly large number of young Sikhs in the UK do today. 
    •   I think Malwa gets more credit for keeping Sikhi alive than it deserves.  Malwa is bigger than Majha and Doaba combined (in both land and population).  So the contributions its people have made to Sikhi in recent times is a bit distorted (I say "recent times", because before 1947, Majha and Malwa were comparable in terms of land and Sikh population).  Malwa is so much bigger that it dominates.   It is notable that even though Majha has a much smaller population than Malwa, the vast majority of young Sikhs who took up arms in the 1980s were from Majha. The Majha district (especially what is now Amritsar District and Tarn Taran District) have historically been the strongholds of Sikhi.  However, this region was the hardest hit during the dark times of the 1980s and 1990s, and it is perhaps the hardest hit today when it comes to the drug epidemic.  Sadly, the Sikh youth in Majha seem to have discarded their kesh, do not follow rehat, and have in many cases succumbed to drugs.
×